WILLIAMS5232 wrote:Dukasaur wrote:WILLIAMS5232 wrote:the nudity was fuzzed out. how is that soft porn? you see worse on public television.
I honestly can't say. I remember the case only because it racked up about three reports in four hours, which is probably something of a record for Most Reported Non-Saxitoxic Thread. I honestly don't remember the details of what was in the thread.
Nor, for that matter, do I care. I was just being nice and answering notyou2's call for clarification. I don't have a horse in this race, and certainly don't deserve this kind of abuse for trying to help:WILLIAMS5232 wrote:what a bunch of bitches around here.
The bitches have a job to be vigilant. A lot of our members play from work or from school, and a lot of the networks they play on use third-party content rating agencies to block domains in a variety of categories, including porn. If even one third-party content rating agency was to tag us for porn, we could be blocked from tens of thousands of networks, and have hundreds or even thousands of users permanently cut off from their games.
You have to put it in perspective. CC exists to provide war games. The bullshit that goes on in the forums, while it may seem important to the zero point two percent of members who participate in it, is ultimately very irrelevant to the 99.8% of the members who come here to play war games. The activities of the 0.2% can't be allowed to jeopardize the activities of the 99.8%, and if being a little overcautious in rooting out porn is the price of defending the war games, I'm all for it.
I like titties as much as any other heterosexual guy, but if I want to see some, there are plenty of websites devoted to that pursuit. Endangering the bread-and-butter of my favourite wargaming site is not an option.
ok, but it wasn't porn. it was a news article.
there was no nudity. i remember it.
i, like you, don't have a dog in the fight. nor do i care about the outcome of this. but i think some people are lame here. and it's that lameness that bugs me to no end. it would appear to me that there are about 3 members here that don't like the poster. that's a guess. and those three members are buddies with someone with the ability to move threads to hidden areas that "wait" for approval. i think that's more childish than putting a thread with fuzzed out nudity in the forums. i guess i could be wrong. but i don't think i am. mainly because i remember the picture in question. and there was nothing offensive unless you don't like heavily pixelated pictures.
AirCanada is having the same problem.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/air-can ... -1.2776551
